Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSpecial Committee of the Whole June 21 20111 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Special Committee Of The Whole June 21, 2011 CALL TO ORDER Council Chair Sam Crawford called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. ROLL CALL (2 :04 :55 PM) Present: Barbara Brenner, Ken Mann, Sam Crawford, Bill Knutzen, Kathy Kershner, Carl Weimer and Tony Larson. Absent: None. 1. ATTORNEY SANDY MACKIE TO PRESENT A REGULATORY UPDATE ON SHORELINES, CRITICAL AREAS, AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT IN WHATCOM COUNTY - AB2011 -186 Sandy Mackie, Perkins Coie LLP Attorney, submitted and read from a presentation (on file). He discussed: • His background and outline of his presentation. • The history of the Shoreline Management Act. • Related court cases. (2:13:58 PM) Brenner asked and there was discussion of whether critical areas regulations apply to shorelines. Mackie continued to discuss: • The original intent of the Shoreline Management Act. • Whether Whatcom County has chosen to regulate the floodways plus 200 feet or floodway plus 200 feet plus the entirety of the 100 -year flood plain. • Whatcom County's shoreline designations and whether they are truly critical areas. • Establishing a nexus between problems caused by a remodel or development project and restoration requirements. (Clerk's Note: The Committee took a break from 2:35 p.m. to 2:47 p.m.) (2 :47 :33 PM) Mackie continued his presentation regarding public access, shorelines, and critical areas. He discussed: • The history of shoreline public access requirements. • The intent of public access requirements. • Whether a development project increases the demand for public access. • Examples of nexus and proportionality between proposed development and public access. Special Committee of the Whole, 6/21/2011, Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 • A property owner's fundamental right to exclude others from private property. • Public Trust Doctrine requirements and related court cases. • How the Whatcom County Code complies with the nexus and proportionality. • Compatibility between the Critical Areas Ordinance and Shoreline Ordinance. • Legislative changes assuring no net loss of ecological function. • The justifications for and appropriateness of buffer requirements. • Critical areas as defined by the survivability of a species. • Buffers for areas with or without naturally functioning conditions. • How they define no net loss. • Requiring no net loss versus restoration. • Critical areas creating nonconforming uses. • Allowing applicants to submit engineering reports that get to no net loss in lieu of using staff. • The ability to opt in to a watershed council to decide guidelines for agricultural lands. Knutzen asked and there was discussion of how the ordinary high water mark is defined. Brenner stated and there was discussion of buffers that are legal because their purpose is to prevent stormwater runoff. Crawford asked and there was discussion of: • Buffers that allowed government to create naturally functioning conditions and a better condition on the shoreline that is compatible with residential development. • The status of litigation against Whatcom County's shoreline buffer requirements. Mann asked and there was discussion of the cumulative effect of losing all areas that have been designated as nonessential for protecting a species. (Clerk's Note: The Committee took a break from 4 :08 p.m. to 4:17 p.m.) (4:17:03 PM) Mackie concluded his presentation. He discussed: • Biological opinions on flood plain development resulting in the destruction of habitat for salmon and orcas. • The Department of Ecology's adoption of federal guidelines for flood plain management rules. • The three options presented to address the biological opinions. • Whether the Whatcom County shoreline ordinance, critical areas ordinance, site plan review for stormwater controls address the questions of retaining flood plains in their natural condition, development in the riparian buffer zones, and creating refuge in off - channel habitat. • Requiring specific stormwater controls, such as low- impact development, rather than stating the objective of a stormwater control that matches historic runoff rates, and allowing a variety of solutions to reach the objective. Mann asked and there was discussion of federal requirements to get federally subsidized flood insurance. Special Committee of the Whole, 6/21/2011, Page 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Brenner asked and there was discussion of low- impact development. (4:40:21 PM) Mann asked and there was discussion of whether there are actual instances of overzealous enforcement of public access laws. Knutzen asked and there was discussion of whether the City of Mt. Vernon used dikes in their equation of the channel migration zone (CMZ). OTHER ITEMS There were no other items. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 4:50 p.m. The Council approved these minutes on July 26 , 2011. ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Please contact the Council Office to obtain an official, signed copy: 360- 676 -6690 or council@�omhatcomma.us Special Committee of the Whole, 6/21/2011, Page 3